Vote on the Basschat Reputation System

[risingson]

I've only scan-read a lot of what's been said so I apologise if I repeat any of the points already made.

I voted for the removal of the system, purely because I think that whilst some people's opinion's will conflict with others, neither is less valid if argued with due care and attention to the validity of one's argument and reasoned thinking. If a situation arose whereby a troll-like comment was made (for example), I would prefer to see the said post ousted by one or more of our intelligent regular posters (of which there are many) or for the mods to take action against the poster in question. The system as I see it at the moment probably serves to bolster more popular opinions, but in the context of reasoned argument an opinion no more valid than that from the opposing side, if that makes sense at all.

Edited November 20, 2011 by risingson

[Marvin]

[quote name='ShergoldSnickers' timestamp='1321792691' post='1443022']
There is a question that needs asking. Apart from 'How do I transfer funds to your bank account Snicks?'

What is the reputation system for? What's its purpose? You can follow that up with... Will the way the function is instigated achieve that purpose? At present, the system encourages me to be slightly lazy and click the arrow rather than responding with words, something already pointed out. It also confuses the voting for post or voting for person issue - again something already pointed out.

I've just looked and I see I have a score way beyond what looks like any sensible totting up of my 'reputation'. Which begs the question: What are we really measuring? What is reputation? Whose measure of reputation? Stuffed if I know. It just all seems a bit arbitrary to me. However, it's not meant to be taken seriously is it? So it doesn't matter really. And I've just wasted 5 minutes valuable snacking time. Rectifying as a I type... nom... nom... nom Wanders off muttering....What is food? Why am I eating now? What is its real purpose? Why does bread mould taste so awful?....
[/quote]

I like this. Ooops, should I have clicked on the little green arrow

[rOB]

voted to keep likes. saves +1/hear hear.

If you disagree you can debate it below the line.

[Marvin]

When is the poll due to close?

It's probably mentioned somewhere, but alas I'm struggling to find it.

[icastle]

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1321779471' post='1442865']
Don't forget to paint the nails on the left hand a nice tarty colour for added excitement.
[/quote]

Hang about, what sort of reputations are we talking about here?

[LawrenceH]

[quote name='Jean-Luc Pickguard' timestamp='1321796029' post='1443059']
Good point snicks. The simple 'like' option seemed to be good for people who would have responded to a post they agreed with by posing a quote followed by +1 without any new content to add. Keeping a total score for someone's account and rating the person, not their individual posts does seem less useful and possible counter-productive.
[/quote]

I agree with this and would change my vote to 'likes only' if it was disconnected from a running 'reputation' tally and de-anonymised. That last is also important for it to function as intended I think.

[discreet]

[quote name='LawrenceH' timestamp='1321800213' post='1443123']
I agree with this and would change my vote to 'likes only' if it was disconnected from a running 'reputation' tally and de-anonymised.
[/quote]

Absolutely. Like it was before this unnecessary change was implemented.

[merello]

Do you get a prize?

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='LawrenceH' timestamp='1321800213' post='1443123']
I agree with this and would change my vote to 'likes only' if it was disconnected from a running 'reputation' tally and de-anonymised. That last is also important for it to function as intended I think.
[/quote]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1321800793' post='1443137']
Absolutely. Like it was before this unnecessary change was implemented.
[/quote]
So, with or without the reputation tally because we had that before?

[Musky]

[quote name='rOB' timestamp='1321798844' post='1443097']
voted to keep likes. saves +1/hear hear.

If you disagree you can debate it below the line.
[/quote]
I think the system was probably implemented with half an eye on the '+1' posts that add nothing else to the thread. However there already is an incentive for these types of post - the post count under the avatars and , more importantly, rewards in the form of little dots and titles (Hyper Elite Member, etc.) or the ability to customise it. If the mods would like to cut down on frivolous posts perhaps we could do away with some of those features.

[Big_Stu]

[quote name='Vibrating G String' timestamp='1321746054' post='1442762']
That a mod would be heavily dropping hints and comments about it shows that the system is already being abused and far from anonymous. This particular mod has an argument with me in another thread and I feel this is being used to win that. I've already been told by one mod that I will be banned if I say anything negative about a mod. Yeah reputation system

My girlfriend opened an account to mock the whole thing. [b]So you have a slander issue that's factually wrong[/b]. Sure she did it to protect me but am I going to tell her to stop as the internet is a scared place and people will get totally bent out of shape if you mock them? I'm sure there's no way this will be rectified short of simply silencing me. So long and thanks for all the fish.
[/quote]


Payback's a bitch ain't it !?! Hey guys!!!

[icastle]

[quote name='Musky' timestamp='1321802953' post='1443169']
I think the system was probably implemented with half an eye on the '+1' posts that add nothing else to the thread. However there already is an incentive for these types of post - the post count under the avatars and , more importantly, rewards in the form of little dots and titles (Hyper Elite Member, etc.) or the ability to customise it. If the mods would like to cut down on frivolous posts perhaps we could do away with some of those features.
[/quote]

That's all very well but it's the 'frivolity' that lets the personalities 'shine through' and makes BassChat the forum that it is - a community where people pull together to support each other through bad times, a valuable resource for information without becoming dry and dull and a sounding board for new ideas.

Take those away and watch BassChat become just another worthless cr*ppy bulletin board...

[Big_Stu]

[quote name='icastle' timestamp='1321804710' post='1443194']
.................. becoming dry and dull .....................
............................. just another worthless cr*ppy bulletin board...
[/quote]

Sounds like the daily weather forecast on Rick Resource

[discreet]

[quote name='EssentialTension' timestamp='1321801200' post='1443144']
So, with or without the reputation tally because we had that before?
[/quote]

Hnnng! OK, Without!

[Musky]

[quote name='icastle' timestamp='1321804710' post='1443194']
That's all very well but it's the 'frivolity' that lets the personalities 'shine through' and makes BassChat the forum that it is - a community where people pull together to support each other through bad times, a valuable resource for information without becoming dry and dull and a sounding board for new ideas.

Take those away and watch BassChat become just another worthless cr*ppy bulletin board...
[/quote]
I'm all for the frivolous, obscure and downright abstract, but I don't think that adding '+1' and absolutely nothing else is really allowing a personality to shine through. Unless we have a lot of members with no personality.

I'm sure I remember one of the mods mentioning that the 'Like' button was added in part to cut down on the simple '+ 1' posts. If that was the intention I was really just pointing out that there is another impetus to such posts besides a wish to demonstrate their general agreement.

[skankdelvar]

[size=5][b]Why the reputation system is flawed: [/b][/size]
[size=5][b]serialised from 'The Campaign Diaries'[/b][/size]
[size=3][b]by Rt Hon Alan Clark MP[/b][/size]

[size=3][b][/b][/size]
[size=2]This page last updated 20th November 2011. (Photo: DelVar Global Media)[/size]

[size=5][b]19th November 1987[/b][/size]

[size=5][size=4]Awake in the London flat to find Jody has left in the night. She is a lovely girl and gifted in the art of fellation, but rather lacking in the brain department. I told her father as much during a committee meeting and was astonished at his reaction. I suppose one should expect that from a counter-jumping nouveau-riche.[/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]To the House for more drab ramblings about the 'Reputation' vote. God, the blackness enters my soul when David Blunkett stumbles to his feet and bleats away in that ghastly Northern accent of his. I slipped his guide dog a laxative, so not entirely a waste of time. [/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]No-one seems to know what the 'Reputation' system involves. Some members think it's an indication of status - rather like a Life Peerage that can be revoked. Others aver that it measures the technical competence of the 'poster'. Half the members are completely unaware of its existence and wander round in a daze, chirruping about string gauges and 'tone'. Frankly, they make me sick with their maunderings. [/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]Is this why I strived so hard to get into politics? My gorge rises when I recall the weeks and months I spent in front of constituency associations, practically begging the stone-faced dullards and petty shopkeepers to adopt me as their candidate. My spirit sinks.[/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]To the Gay Hussar for lunch. That odious little puffball Ken Clarke is dining with some American and his girlfriend. No doubt keen to display his 'connections' Clarke rises to his feet and motions me across.[/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]"Alan! Alan! I'd like you to meet my friend Maurice from California. Maurice, this is Alan Clarke. He's a junior Minister of Defence"[/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]The Yank looks unimpressed and launches into a diatribe about truth and war and rape. Clarke looks abashed as well he should. I look the Yank in the eye.[/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]"The only war you should worry about is the one when the British Army burnt down your White House in 1812. Keep a civil tongue in your head or I might just ask the captain of HMS Christchurch to put a cruise missile through your window."[/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]The Yank goes white around the gills while his ladyfriend leans over and squeezes his hand to reassure him. A good-looking filly with a glint in her eye. I hand her my card and suggest that she join me later for a nightcap. Good possibility, I think.[/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]Business done for the day, I motor down to Saltwood in the Bentley. British engineering at its finest. Such a shame that the company is owned by by bullet-headed Prussians intent on revenge for the military reverses they have suffered at our hands. [/size][/size][size=5][size=4]They may protest that they're all level-headed, analytical types these days, but experience teaches otherwise. [/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]I recall that dumpy little German scientist I met on a trade visit - what was her name - Angela? - who was all statistics and frigid smiles until I bent her over the kitchenette counter and set to with a will. At her moment of climax, she clawed the wood to splinters, repeatedly screaming "Deutschland uber alles!" at the top of her voice. Such Teutonic passion cannot be contained. There will be another war, mark my words.[/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]Once home, I receive a call from Cameron, my new PPS. A ruddy-cheeked boy who looks a bit of a sneak. I doubt he will rise far.[/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]Calamity. I am recalled to the House. [/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]The Reputation debate has hit a snag and the 22 is in an uproar. Apparently a vote for either of the two 'like' options will cancel out the 'dislike' vote. (Don't ask me). That prissy little Welsh crawler Geoffrey Howe is entirely to blame. 'Democracy' is a farce. The minute you start giving people a choice, society unravels and the lower classes try to take over.[/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]So, back to London. I arrive at the flat to find the Californian lady sitting on the steps. I offer her my hand and we go upstairs. Bugger the vote.[/size][/size]

[size=1]..[/size] Edited November 20, 2011 by skankdelvar

[BigRedX]

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1321808334' post='1443269']
Bugger the vote.
[/quote]
This ;-)

[pete.young]

The instructions about this weren't very clear: I thought it worked like a 'like' button for individual posts and I didn't realise that the scores were being accumulated.

This is very confusing: I'd like to reserve the right to disagree with someone's opinion on one subject, whilst still respecting their reputation. Or vice versa.

There's another comment from Hamster about it being introduced in an attempt to make people behave more reasonably in off-topic. Is it possible to just activate the reputation for off-topic?

I think it's a bit much to inflict it on the whole site, just because one tiny set of people in Off-Topic can't behave. I'd rather see individuals banned or Off-Topic removed altogether.

Personally I think it should go. It doesn't improve anything, it's not clear how to use it, and we've managed fine without it for several years.

[Big_Stu]

[quote name='pete.young' timestamp='1321813104' post='1443366']
The instructions about this weren't very clear: I thought it worked like a 'like' button for individual posts and I didn't realise that the scores were being accumulated.

This is very confusing: I'd like to reserve the right to disagree with someone's opinion on one subject, whilst still respecting their reputation. Or vice versa.

There's another comment from Hamster about it being introduced in an attempt to make people behave more reasonably in off-topic. Is it possible to just activate the reputation for off-topic?

I think it's a bit much to inflict it on the whole site, just because one tiny set of people in Off-Topic can't behave. I'd rather see individuals banned or Off-Topic removed altogether.

Personally I think it should go. It doesn't improve anything, it's not clear how to use it, and we've managed fine without it for several years.
[/quote]

If I didn't think it counter-productive to the post I'd approve this post, pity I can't "Like" it instead .................. ah .............. I know ................... erm


+1

[discreet]

[quote name='pete.young' timestamp='1321813104' post='1443366']
I'd rather see individuals banned or Off-Topic removed altogether.[/quote]

I don't get the anti-Off Topic Brigade... if you dislike Off-Topic that much then why go there?
It's just control-freakery IMHO.

[BigRedX]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1321813545' post='1443376']
I don't get the anti-Off Topic Brigade... if you dislike Off-Topic that much then why go there?
It's just control-freakery IMHO.
[/quote]
There are several musical threads in Off-Topic that are interesting and which I'd like to contribute to. However no matter how hard I try it's difficult not to get sucked in to the non-musical w***ery that also gets posted.

Personally I'd like Off Topic to be split into separate musical and non-musical forums but for some reason the Mods are reluctant to entertain this suggestion.

[leschirons]

[quote name='ShergoldSnickers' timestamp='1321792691' post='1443022']
There is a question that needs asking. Apart from 'How do I transfer funds to your bank account Snicks?'

What is the reputation system for? What's its purpose? You can follow that up with... Will the way the function is instigated achieve that purpose? At present, the system encourages me to be slightly lazy and click the arrow rather than responding with words, something already pointed out. It also confuses the voting for post or voting for person issue - again something already pointed out.

I've just looked and I see I have a score way beyond what looks like any sensible totting up of my 'reputation'. Which begs the question: What are we really measuring? What is reputation? Whose measure of reputation? Stuffed if I know. It just all seems a bit arbitrary to me. However, it's not meant to be taken seriously is it? So it doesn't matter really. And I've just wasted 5 minutes valuable snacking time. Rectifying as a I type... nom... nom... nom Wanders off muttering....What is food? Why am I eating now? What is its real purpose? Why does bread mould taste so awful?....
[/quote]

You start with, "There is a question that needs asking" and then, you asked eleven questions. I liked that, and will now push the appropriate button to make it known.

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1321813927' post='1443390']
There are several musical threads in Off-Topic that are interesting and which I'd like to contribute to. However no matter how hard I try it's difficult not to get sucked in to the non-musical w***ery that also gets posted.

Personally I'd like Off Topic to be split into separate musical and non-musical forums but for some reason the Mods are reluctant to entertain this suggestion.
[/quote]
I'd very much support this. Especially the word w***ery.

[Big_Stu]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1321813567' post='1443377']
+1
[/quote]
Thanks for that, though I'd have preferred a .......... no ...wait!...

[discreet]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1321813927' post='1443390']
Personally I'd like Off Topic to be split into separate musical and non-musical forums but for some reason the Mods are reluctant to entertain this suggestion.
[/quote]

Hardly surprising. They'd spend 24 hours a day on there deciding what's musical and what isn't.
Remember that OT was created specifically 'For talking crap really - or anything not bass related at least.'